10/8/2019 |
Kandace |
Zuber |
Past and (Was a) future Maine Resident |
Brandon |
Vermont |
My husband and I left Maine 6 years ago. We were making plans to return next spring but have had second thoughts since Mills was elected. She is not for helping the citizens of Maine. My husband and I left Maine 6 years ago. We were making plans to return next spring but have had second thoughts since Mills was elected. She is not for helping the citizens of Maine. |
- |
10/17/2019 |
Dave |
Johnson |
n/a |
underhill |
Vermont |
I am very concerned over the TCIs goal of rationing fuel through auctions. This will artificialy drive up fuel costs for the most vulnerable in the state. We have no control over these fuel... read more I am very concerned over the TCIs goal of rationing fuel through auctions. This will artificialy drive up fuel costs for the most vulnerable in the state. We have no control over these fuel rations yet what happens when we have an unusually cold winter and lets say with long term power outages. Then what, we pay the piper. What happens when the fuel carbon allowance is exceeded due to out of state visitors that we forget to factor in to the equation. Killington World Cup attracts thousands of SUVs. In the seventies, I was taught personal responsibility, and to spread that message. Now we teach our children that ineffective protesting is the only way forward. Teach your children how to be a custodian of the planet and stay out of my life. Climate change=corporate greed, not me and my family trying to survive on less and less. Take away everyones money and theyll quit polluting the planet. Start with Leo and Al? |
- |
11/4/2019 |
Jack |
Widness |
none |
Wilmington |
Vermont |
I am strongly supportive of what the Transportation and Climate Initiative (TCI) states are developing as a regional policy for low-carbon transportation. With accelerating climate change/warming... read more I am strongly supportive of what the Transportation and Climate Initiative (TCI) states are developing as a regional policy for low-carbon transportation. With accelerating climate change/warming of the earth, we urgently need to cap and reduce carbon emissions from the combustion of transportation fuels. This might be done through a cap-and-invest program as the TCI has suggest, or through other pricing mechanism. This needs to be be done in the context of an aggressive, health and conservation focused policy approach that is developed, adopted and implemented as soon as can be managed. Our future depends on this. This should be a top priority of our local, state and federal government. |
- |
11/4/2019 |
James |
Burde |
Teiki Design Studio |
Jericho |
Vermont |
I support TCI as a way toward a stronger economy, equity for low-income and rural Vermonters, and a reduction in carbon pollution. I support TCI as a way toward a stronger economy, equity for low-income and rural Vermonters, and a reduction in carbon pollution. |
- |
11/4/2019 |
Nancy |
Hamor |
Select your title |
South Burlington |
Vermont |
Get serious. The climate Crisis and our infrastructure crisis are not going to fix themselves. It is time to do something that will provide a means to a proactive, positive change for my... read more Get serious. The climate Crisis and our infrastructure crisis are not going to fix themselves. It is time to do something that will provide a means to a proactive, positive change for my grandchildren's future. |
- |
11/4/2019 |
kevin |
leveret |
unaligned |
white river jct |
Vermont |
Stop d**king around with carbon pricing & cap-and-investment, and push for a comprehensive Green New Deal (we are too deep in the 6th mass extinction to settle for band-aids). Stop d**king around with carbon pricing & cap-and-investment, and push for a comprehensive Green New Deal (we are too deep in the 6th mass extinction to settle for band-aids). |
- |
11/4/2019 |
Don |
Cummings |
Citizen |
South Burlington |
Vermont |
This is an excellent proposal. I urge Vermont’s Governor Scott to support an aggressive program to fight the Climate Crisis This is an excellent proposal. I urge Vermont’s Governor Scott to support an aggressive program to fight the Climate Crisis |
- |
11/4/2019 |
Matthew |
Cota |
Vermont Fuel Dealers Association |
Montpelier |
Vermont |
The Transportation Climate Initiative sets out a framework that imposes an unfair burden on all vehicle owners and thousands of businesses.
I am opposed to the TCI plan as outlined... read more The Transportation Climate Initiative sets out a framework that imposes an unfair burden on all vehicle owners and thousands of businesses.
I am opposed to the TCI plan as outlined: Capping sales of gasoline and diesel, requiring suppliers to purchase allowances in order to sell motor fuel, and having consumers pay higher prices at the pump in order to subsidize electric vehicles.
This proposal negatively impacts low income Vermonters, particularly those that live in rural areas of the state. It would only help those who are considering purchasing a new electric vehicle and/or those that live in urban areas with access to public transportation.
Furthermore, while some consumers may be able to choose public transportation or an electric car to avoid the increased cost in gasoline, there is no viable option for businesses that need diesel trucks. In Vermont, 25% of the motor fuel sold is diesel— and we need diesel trucks to haul milk, logs and other products that benefit our agricultural economy. Diesel is also sold with increasing blends of renewable biodiesel, which is critical for Vermont and the Northeast to meet our energy goals.
We ask you to slow down this process, consider taking diesel fuel out of TCI and ensure that renewable liquid fuels such as biodiesel are not taxed in the same manner as petroleum fuel. |
- |
11/4/2019 |
Kevin |
Conti |
Vermont Resident |
Williamstown |
Vermont |
The Transportation Climate Initiative sets out a framework that imposes an unfair burden on all vehicle owners and thousands of businesses.
I am opposed to the TCI plan as outlined... read more The Transportation Climate Initiative sets out a framework that imposes an unfair burden on all vehicle owners and thousands of businesses.
I am opposed to the TCI plan as outlined: Capping sales of gasoline and diesel, requiring suppliers to purchase allowances in order to sell motor fuel, and having consumers pay higher prices at the pump in order to subsidize electric vehicles.
This proposal negatively impacts low income Vermonters, particularly those that live in rural areas of the state. It would only help those who are considering purchasing a new electric vehicle and/or those that live in urban areas with access to public transportation.
Furthermore, while some consumers may be able to choose public transportation or an electric car to avoid the increased cost in gasoline, there is no viable option for businesses that need diesel trucks. In Vermont, 25% of the motor fuel sold is diesel— and we need diesel trucks to haul milk, logs and other products that benefit our agricultural economy. Diesel is also sold with increasing blends of renewable biodiesel, which is critical for Vermont and the Northeast to meet our energy goals.
We ask you to slow down this process and consider taking diesel fuel out of TCI. |
- |
11/4/2019 |
Judy |
Taranovich |
Proctor Gas Inc. |
Proctor |
Vermont |
I hope this response is taken seriously - i am not just a propane company owner. i am a Vermont tax payer who has NO interest in being forced into an electric vehicle and that is what this is... read more I hope this response is taken seriously - i am not just a propane company owner. i am a Vermont tax payer who has NO interest in being forced into an electric vehicle and that is what this is designed to do. I also have no interest in a heat pump home in New England. I have already seen (and my company has worked on) too many frozen pipes in homes with heat pumps!! This is yet just another freedom being taken away Because someone somewhere has decided this is the only way to save the planet! or is it? i am old enough to remember the ozone layer being destroyed and we were all going to burn up if we didn't do something right away. now these same scientists are back with yet another scare. i'm not saying don't be good stewards of what we have but where is the common sense and balance??
i'm a little company and don't have the power of the environmental lobby groups and electric companies but i will fight this until i am forced out of the state i was born and raised in by people who have just come here to take over!!
don't even get me started on the fact nobody will be able to afford higher taxes - but then, as I've already stated, i guess that's the plan - right:( |
- |
11/4/2019 |
Matt |
Musgrave |
Associated General Contractors of Vermont |
Montpelier |
Vermont |
While AGC/VT is interested in working towards solutions regarding our climate and environment we believe that more thought be put into this program. Specifically we oppose adding the tax to diesel... read more While AGC/VT is interested in working towards solutions regarding our climate and environment we believe that more thought be put into this program. Specifically we oppose adding the tax to diesel fuels. We have been told that dyed diesel and diesel used in heavy equipment like excavators are not intended to fall into the TCI tax, but its not clear how it would be avoided. The diesel used by the construction industry is typically delivered in bulk and is "dyed diesel". Currently there are requirements from ANR in some cases to identify total uses of those fuels and the reason is for potential future carbon taxation according the ANRs clean air division. It is important for agencies and TCI advocates to understand that these fees/taxes will be passed on to individuals and government agencies employing services from the private sector. This will either increase costs of roads, bridges and buildings, or provide an opportunity for organizations outside of TCI districts to step in and under bid for services which could kill local economies. At the very least adding a 30 tax to diesel would result in an additional cost of approx $16.20 for a truck to run from White River to just Montpelier or $7000-10000+ per construction vehicles annual usage. These costs multiplied by the sheer volume of commercial and government work would have a major effect the state and private consumers in the multi millions. This new expense would be a heavy lift for the already challenged appropriations of our state.
If/When TCI comes to be, Vermont is expected to benefit from $30-60 million per year depending on the source I have spoken with. It is imperative that any monies gained by this transportation program have a nexus to transportation. The majority of the fuel taxes we pay already go to general fund projects while our road and bridge infrastructure continue to age and have been level funded at approximately 1/3 of VTRANS budget requests. This is an emerging crisis as the state depends of federal funds which are based on "grades" of our road maintenance. TCI funds should not go in the general fund, clean water fund or go to unfunded pension liabilities. It should stay in transportation whether it would be used to modernize our roads, or improve public transportation so more people use it. |
- |
11/4/2019 |
David |
Durfee |
Climate Advocates of Bennington affiliate of 350 Vermont |
Bennington |
Vermont |
Prevention of the most disastrous effects of climate heating requires the equitable, coordinated, action of millions of people backed by the authority of government.Single states by themselves are... read more Prevention of the most disastrous effects of climate heating requires the equitable, coordinated, action of millions of people backed by the authority of government.Single states by themselves are not enough.A national effort would be best, but is impossible under the current administration. Mutual effort, support, among groups of states is probably the best we can hope for and would produce mutual benefits for them. |
- |
11/4/2019 |
William |
Christian |
Energy Committee (North Bennington-Shaftbury VT) |
North Bennington |
Vermont |
We face a climate emergency and cannot win unless we start immediately. The Cap and Trade can be a valuable tool but it must be done soon and aggressively. If gasoline stays cheap and plentiful,... read more We face a climate emergency and cannot win unless we start immediately. The Cap and Trade can be a valuable tool but it must be done soon and aggressively. If gasoline stays cheap and plentiful, we will fail to save the climate. So thanks for implementing this legislation.
|
- |
11/4/2019 |
Diegoli |
Diegoli |
Ms. |
Springfield |
Vermont |
I am in favor of the Transportation & Climate Initiative (TCI) because:
it is a multi-state effort;
it would use the cap-and-invest version of carbon pricing to modernize our... read more I am in favor of the Transportation & Climate Initiative (TCI) because:
it is a multi-state effort;
it would use the cap-and-invest version of carbon pricing to modernize our transportation system;
it could, if well designed and properly implemented, generate millions of dollars for public transit, bike paths, EV incentives and infrastructure.
TCI could help achieve a stronger economy, equity for low-income and rural Vermonters, and a reduction in carbon pollution.
Thank you for your attention. |
- |
11/5/2019 |
Bill |
Smith |
VT Truck and Bus Assoc |
Northfield |
Vermont |
The trucking industry is very concerned about TCI increasing the cost of delivering goods to Vermonters without any means of reducing the cost. Unlike pleasure cars, heavy trucks do not have a... read more The trucking industry is very concerned about TCI increasing the cost of delivering goods to Vermonters without any means of reducing the cost. Unlike pleasure cars, heavy trucks do not have a viable alternative such as electric vehicles, alternate fuel vehicles, riding the bus, or combining trips. Class 8 heavy truck production is several years out, at least, and when available will cost significantly more. In addition, the infrastructure to charge those trucks does not exist. Some trucks can run on LNG or CNG, but that is a very specific type of trucking (garbage hauling or bus, for example), and has a significant infrastructure cost for each business.
Our trips are determined by the location of the customer, and as such cannot be avoided. Combining deliveries is something which is already done--- efficient logistics of truck deliveries and bus trips is already at the forefront of the industry's focus.
Without any viable alternative the costs of funding TCI--- presumably from a charge on diesel fuel--- will be borne by this industry and its customers, putting Vermont businesses at a competitive disadvantage with companies in non-TCI states, and increasing costs without the ability to mitigate them.
Thank you for considering our concerns,
William S Smith, Esq.
VT Truck and Bus Association
|
- |
11/5/2019 |
John |
McClaughry |
Ethan Allen Institute |
Kirby |
Vermont |
The TCI is a “reactionary liberalism” dream: extract millions of dollars from people who can’t figure out why their motor fuel bills are steadily creeping up, and spread the revenues around to pay... read more The TCI is a “reactionary liberalism” dream: extract millions of dollars from people who can’t figure out why their motor fuel bills are steadily creeping up, and spread the revenues around to pay for “carbon reduction investments”.
The TCI is astoundingly, one might even say diabolically, complex. The details, not yet finalized, will emerge in a draft Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) scheduled to appear in December. After public input, the MOU will go to Gov. Phil Scott. His signature would put Vermont into the 12-state deal.
Then either the Regulated Terminals that supply motor fuel to eighty Vermont distributors, or the distributors themselves, will have to purchase “allowances”, the cost of which will be inconspicuously added into the price paid by consumers.
The TCI’s administrative body will decide how many allowances must be issued to sufficiently drive up the price of motor fuel, thus reducing the amount of motor fuel consumed, thus reducing to below an arbitrary TCI-set cap those awful carbon dioxide emissions that are driving the planet toward Al Gore’s heat death.
Did I mention that no legislator will ever vote on this stealth carbon tax? Governor Phil Scott, alone, can plunge Vermont into this mega-scheme to sock Vermonters with a carbon tax that the TCI backers hope they’ll never figure out.
But Gov. Scott has repeatedly voiced his opposition to a carbon tax. What if he refuses to sign on to the MOU? Here’s another diabolical feature. If he doesn’t sign the MOU, Vermont motorists will still be forced to pay for the cost of the allowances hidden back up the supply chain in Massachusetts and New York. But Vermont would not be eligible to receive its assigned share of the net revenues (after enormous enforcement and legal costs) from the TCI allowance sales.
Here’s the short takeaway. The TCI MOU is designed to make Vermont consumers pay a steadily increasing carbon tax on their gasoline and diesel fuel. No legislator will ever vote on imposing this tax. It will just happen, courtesy of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and the climate change warriors like VPIRG who extol its benefits. After ten years of increasing motor fuel prices, the TCI will have produced no detectable effect whatever on climate change.
|
- |
11/5/2019 |
George |
Gross |
private citizen, as an energy policy public advocate |
Shoreham |
Vermont |
Please refer to the uploaded comments document, entitled "The Transportation Climate Initiative Consortium Must Achieve Zero Greenhouse Gas Emissions by 2050". Supporting technical and... read more Please refer to the uploaded comments document, entitled "The Transportation Climate Initiative Consortium Must Achieve Zero Greenhouse Gas Emissions by 2050". Supporting technical and economic data is available upon request. Although I have participated in TCI stakeholder workshops conducted by Vermont's Agency of Natural Resources as in my role as the Chairperson of the Town of Shoreham Planning Commission, this is an individual submission and it has not been approved or disapproved for publication by our Planning Commission. |
gmgross_comments_on_TCI_framework_final_v2019_1105.pdf |
11/5/2019 |
William |
Driscoll |
Associated Industries of Vermont |
Montpelier |
Vermont |
As currently proposed, TCI would result in a potentially significant effective tax on highway gasoline and diesel. This would increase costs for manufacturers, retailers, dairy, forestry, mineral... read more As currently proposed, TCI would result in a potentially significant effective tax on highway gasoline and diesel. This would increase costs for manufacturers, retailers, dairy, forestry, mineral, and other businesses dependent on highway transportation for moving supplies and goods, as well as construction and other contractors dependent on vehicles, both through direct costs and the cost of transportation service providers.
Unlike residential drivers, who might respond to higher costs by adjusting driving habits and potentially converting to more efficient vehicles, and for whom states could fund programs supporting such changes with revenues allocated from TCI, the commercial transportation noted above is already driven to be as efficient as possible in terms of both logistical planning and transportation technology owing to regulatory requirements and the high costs of transportation generally, compounded by the competitive pressures businesses already face.
Without meaningful options to reduce exposure to the effective tax impact of TCI through behavioral or technology changes, or options for states to fund programs supporting such changes with revenues allocated from TCI, this cost impact could only be mitigated by moving production or operations out of the impacted region, or businesses would be left facing the consequences of trying to absorb or pass on costs to consumers.
TCI would therefore appear to promise little if any change in commercial transportation carbon emissions unless produced by reduced business operations, with resulting loss of employment and economic activity. This would be both fundamentally inequitable and highly cost ineffective.
The most efficient way to address the concerns outlined above while proceeding with TCI would be to exclude diesel from the program and focus on highway gasoline and related transportation issues and opportunities. This would protect the overwhelming majority of commercial transportation, and states could still work to assist businesses with smaller, gasoline fueled vehicle options.
Nevertheless, even focusing on highway gasoline could still lead to other economic and social consequences, particularly in rural areas. These potential consequences should be fully explored, explained, and opened to public review and comment before states take formal steps forward on the TCI proposal.
|
- |
11/5/2019 |
Alex |
DePillis |
Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets |
Montpelier |
Vermont |
Attached please find the joint comments of the Vermont Agency of Agriculture and the Vermont Clean Cities Coalition (https://vtccc.w3.uvm.edu/).
These comments were developed in... read more Attached please find the joint comments of the Vermont Agency of Agriculture and the Vermont Clean Cities Coalition (https://vtccc.w3.uvm.edu/).
These comments were developed in coordination and consultation with Vermont Fuel Dealers Association, Dairy Farmers of America, Agrimark Coop, Vermont Department of Public Service, and Energy Vision. We have also shared a draft with the Agency of Natural Resources, and had the benefit of their assistance to understand how the eventual rules might work.
|
Comments on framework final.docx |
11/5/2019 |
Johanna |
Miller |
Vermont Natural Resources Council |
Montpelier |
Vermont |
Transportation & Climate Initiative Regional Policy Workgroup,
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the “Framework for a Draft Regional Policy Proposal” released on... read more Transportation & Climate Initiative Regional Policy Workgroup,
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the “Framework for a Draft Regional Policy Proposal” released on October 1, 2019. We – the undersigned organizations – view the Transportation and Climate Initiative (TCI) as an important opportunity for regional collaboration on a pressing problem. We also believe that robust public input into both the regional and state decision-making process is essential to ensure an equitable policy design and the best program possible.
We face an existential crisis when it comes to climate change. Our collective greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions – largely from the combustion of fossil fuels and, in our region, largely coming from the transportation sector – are putting our economies, public health, and quality of life at great risk. Strategies that are carefully designed to reduce carbon pollution as swiftly as possible, in an equitable manner, are essential. TCI offers one of those opportunities. Getting it right, but getting it done, is essential. And, then we will need to do more.
Vermont is far from meeting its long-standing climate goals, with most of our GHG emissions increases coming from our most carbon-intensive sector: transportation. A strong program – including a strong cap – will be important to put Vermont and the region on track to start meeting our carbon pollution reduction commitments.
In these comments we offer some high-level input on our hopes for a strong program that could take our states, and our region collectively, one big step forward to reducing carbon pollution and, importantly, helping to create a cleaner, more diverse, more accessible 21st century transportation system. We appreciate the direction it appears TCI states are moving on several fronts and the opportunity to highlight some of the key characteristics we believe are essential to a strong, equitable program.
Thank you in advance for your consideration of this input and, more so, for your hard work to date – and the important work to come – to shape the design of a program that works for our planet and all people.
Equity
The prioritization of equity in the design of this program is key to its success, and we commend your recognition of it as a top priority. This program must – and, we believe, can – be designed to begin to dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions while also improving access, mobility, and public health for vulnerable and disproportionately impacted populations in particular. Ensuring this outcome will require an ongoing, inclusive, and strong public process, in particular for getting input on where any revenues would best be directed. Considering the differences among and within each state, utilizing potential TCI proceeds to address and prioritize equity, mobility, and access for more rural, low income, vulnerable and disproportionately impacted populations is essential.
In rural Vermont, transportation is a huge equity issue. It is a barrier to accessing and retaining a job and meeting basic needs such as getting to medical appointments, the grocery store and the pharmacy. The lack of transportation options leave many Vermonters isolated and alone, specifically the 1/3 of Vermonters who do not drive (this includes one in five adults over 65 years of age, people with a disability, children and those who choose not to drive). It is also a tremendous economic burden for low income households, where transportation accounts for approximately 50 percent of their energy bills. Strategies that serve a rural region well and enable Vermonters access to more clean, diverse transportation solutions are needed, and TCI revenues could serve as an important means to spur the investments required to make this transition.
Affected Fuels and Emissions
We support the TCI states’ proposal to cap carbon emissions from the combustion of motor gasoline and on-road diesel fuel in the region, as these fuels account for the vast majority of emissions from the transportation sector. We also urge that in the future other fossil fuels, such as Compressed Natural Gas (CNG), be considered for coverage as well, to avoid them being falsely viewed as a solution to transportation sector emissions.
Program Design: Auctions, Allocation, Regional Caps and Allowance Budgets
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has concluded that we have about a decade to substantially reduce emissions if we are to avoid the worst impacts of climate
disruption. As such, it is essential that states set a regional emissions cap at the outset of the program that is sufficiently ambitious to align both with states’ climate targets and with scientific imperatives. To ensure TCI serves as the strongest tool possible to reduce emissions, the cap should start low and drop as quickly as possible, in line with the latest climate science. Further, to achieve the GHG outcomes needed, states should also auction all allowances.
Investment of Proceeds
For the TCI program to succeed – and for states and the region to begin to reduce emissions in our most intensive sector – how revenues are invested is critical. Any TCI revenues must be reinvested in solutions that reduce pollution – as quickly as possible in the short term – as well as set the stage for avoided emissions in the long term, by giving people options for getting where they need to go by walking, biking, and taking transit, and well as the option to live in compact communities close to jobs, services, and amenities.
We believe parameters around the use of these proceeds are essential. These dollars should go to transportation-related solutions or solutions that reduce the need for transportation. TCI proceeds should not be spent to backfill budgets for roads, bridges, general funds, or, even, other needed climate solutions like weatherization or thermal fuel switching. We must find other means to meet these needs, but TCI proceeds should be harnessed to reduce carbon pollution from transportation and help to create a more connected, diverse, resilient, clean, and affordable transportation system.
Specifically, we believe any TCI revenues should prioritize low- and moderate-income and rural Vermonters without access to public transportation. The types of solutions we’d like to see prioritized include electrification of cars, buses, and bikes; transit; transportation demand management strategies like carpool, vanpool, and other creative ride-sharing techniques; safe walking and biking infrastructure; smart growth land use solutions; housing in downtowns and community centers and more.
We appreciate and support the flexibility envisioned for states to identify the best strategies and investments to meet their unique needs. We also hope to see in Vermont – but also potentially to help drive innovation more broadly – the ability for all states to spend some TCI proceeds to fund innovative pilots such as micro-transit, high-efficiency vehicle incentive programs (especially to serve low income earners), or other creative strategies that could drive reductions, enable access, and help to fill in the gaps where more traditional strategies might fall short. This includes enabling the flexibility for geo-targeted investment strategies that could serve specific regions well, considering that the best solutions for bigger cities and towns might not be the best or most-needed strategies to serve smaller communities and rural areas.
Complementary Policies
No one climate policy, including TCI, will accomplish all of the climate pollution reductions we need. We will need a diverse suite of significant, complementary policies to get the job done. We look forward to working with other TCI states, with diverse constituencies in Vermont and beyond and with policy makers to identify and advance that suite of other strategies to complement TCI, finally putting us on the path to meet science-based reduction targets we so desperately need to meet.
Conclusion
This regional effort presents the most promising opportunity at this time to tackle emissions reductions in our heavily carbon-intensive transportation sector. Shaping a strong program in line with the climate science, while also prioritizing strategies and solutions to serve low-income, rural, and disproportionately impacted communities is imperative.
As noted above, even a strong TCI will not be sufficient to do all that we must to reduce pollution. That is why we also strongly encourage you to design an equitable TCI program that could, one day, potentially link to other carbon markets – if that made sense. We know that reducing carbon pollution in our heating sector is also a climate imperative. The ability for a well-structured TCI program to link to successful programs like California and Quebec’s Western Climate Initiative would provide the flexibility for the region (or states in the region) to participate in this economy-wide market. We urge you to enable that kind of design and flexibility in the program.
Thank you again for your hard work, your ongoing commitment to designing a science-based, equitable, and flexible program, and for your consideration of our input.
Sincerely,
Audubon Vermont
Capstone Community Action
Transportation for Vermonters
Vermont Conservation Voters
VEIC
Vermont Natural Resources Council
Vermont Public Interest Research Group
CC:
Julie Moore, Secretary of the Agency of Natural Resources
Peter Walke, Deputy Secretary of the Agency of Natural Resources
Michelle Boomhauer, Director of Policy and Planning, Vermont Agency of Transportation
Curt McCormack, Chair, Vermont House Transportation Committee
Dick Mazza, Chair, Vermont Senate Transportation Committee
Vermont Senate President Pro Tempore Tim Ashe
Vermont Speaker of the House Mitzi Johnson
|
Joint Comments-TCI-Nov. 5.docx |